Quote: Originally posted by ssmithfan98 on 6/14/2009So is it better to sign a proven veteran or a decent very young player.I signed two 28 year olds that are 57 and 58 OVR.And I signed the 19s and the 20. Which was the better deal?
The 28 year olds are the better deal, if they were signed for a one-year contract. They'll give an immediate return, while the younger guys are potentially good players.
As far as improvement goes, I'm starting to notice something with the young players. I signed an 18 year old in season 3 with a 42 overall, and he went up to 48 by the end of the season. Halfway through season 4, he's up to 51 BUT... his ratings aren't progressing at the same rate. This is more proof that there's probably a hard cap on the potential ratings that we can't see.
For example, his offensive corner kick went from 39 to 50 in the first season, but from 50 to 54 so far this season. Also, his shooting went from 24 to 31 last year, but from 31 to 33 so far this year. It's really iffy on what to expect from those guys - a high-risk, potentially high-reward type of investment. Sign a prodigy to a 5 year deal for next to nothing, you're looking good. Get a dud for that time, and it locks up roster space and payroll until the contract expires.